Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Assimilation Is Stigmatized: Let’s Write a New Narrative

 

The United States has always taken pride in its ability to assimilate its new immigrants, creating an exciting and diverse fabric for the American ethos. Lately, though, there has been much discussion about the unwillingness of immigrants, legal or not, to assimilate into this country. I began to think about the meaning of assimilating, what it used to define and what has changed. It became clear to me that this is an issue that must be addressed and that may be even more serious than immigration problems themselves.

What does it mean to be absorbed or integrated into the culture?

The Left planted the seeds about 100 years ago for redefining assimilation, and we now live in a society that is fractured and fractious. I believe these are the events that brought us to our situation today.

Let’s begin to look at the start of our assimilation problems in this country. They actually are connected to perceptions that emerged from World Wars I and II. Out of those wars, a belief formed that the root of those conflicts was nationalism. If we look at this analysis carefully, we realize that it is absurd. The source of those conflicts was Germany’s obsession with becoming the world power; its desire to reach that goal included nationalism but was hardly limited to it. More than that, one could argue that the only way the nations could have successfully fought Germany was due to their own nationalism, the desire for the people and their countries to survive, free of German rule. Yet, the myths persisted that nationalism was destructive, evil, and was likened to Nazism, and the best alternative was to live in a global society where we created shared values.

You might notice that this belief originated in Europe, not the US. But for many years the Left in the US has admired European culture; naturally, despising nationalism was included in that package. And what followed here was the emerging belief that the US, because of its patriotism and nationalism, was part of an evil nationalist system. That’s when the idea was promoted that not only was a global system required to keep peace, but diversity was key, too: to assimilate into a nationalistic system was feeding the war gods. Instead, we needed idealized cultures other than our own, and the cult of diversity was born.

Unfortunately, the Left still has not learned that celebrating diversity has many drawbacks. Idealizing cultures other than our own means approving of tribal and primitive beliefs such as female genital mutilation and honor killing. Other countries are trained to hate the US as a colonialist nation. The list of reasons not to assimilate in the US but to remain separate and embrace one’s own culture wholeheartedly has been the bane of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Promoting diversity not only fractures society, but we encourage division by essentially saying that other cultures are better than ours and must be accepted and accommodated. Thus, over the last 20 years, we have seen Mexicans flying the Mexican flag here, while Muslims have been provided with prayer rooms, foot baths, and special foods.

Worse yet, the anti-assimilation culture has eroded the very foundations of America. Efforts to change the meaning of the Constitution, change the three levels of government, and encourage (or at least ignore) violence and protests are becoming the norm. In other words, the very foundations that make America great are being destroyed in favor of confusion, anarchy, hate and ignoring the rule of law.

It has to stop.

We must re-establish a new promise of the American Dream by hailing the advantages of assimilation for all its citizens. We must develop a consistent message that the “melting pot” is not leftover stew, but a fine banquet of opportunity. Assimilation must be re-defined and clarified for our current citizens and for new immigrants to our country. How can we do that?

First, we must take back our schools. Special curriculums can be developed that provide a balanced view of American history. The schools that teach this curriculum will be acknowledged nationally for their efforts. I know that this will be like Sisyphus pushing the boulder up the mountain, but if we don’t find a way to make this work, school by school, we are lost.

Second, we must stop accommodating people for their cultural “needs”: no foot baths; no prayer rooms; no special foods for anyone. Children who have special diets can brown-bag their lunches. Parents need to take responsibility for the needs of their children, for their families, and for their own lives.

Schools must include a class on government including sections on the Constitution. It should be a requirement in elementary and high school and a curriculum can be provided that will help teachers and students relate to the information.

Students must be able to speak English fluently by the third grade, or within two years of entering school. Adults will not be able to become an American citizen without speaking English fluently.

People are welcome to continue their religious or cultural practices, as long as they don’t violate US law. They cannot impose them on others outside their own families or religious communities.

The key to all these actions is to teach people what assimilation really means. They will learn what it means to live in a free society. They are free to practice their religions and cultures within their homes and communities, that is, privately; they are free to realize the Bill of Rights. They are free to participate in any aspect of society. They will see patriotism in practice.

It is time to bring order back to this country, and recognize that freedom and assimilation do not mean doing or getting anything you want. In this country, we are all accountable to each other, responsible for our well-being, respecting differences, and yet knowing what a gift it is to be able to live in the United States of America. That’s what assimilation means.

What suggestions do you have for improving the practice and understanding of assimilation?

There are 113 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Trink Coolidge
    TrinkJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Susan Quinn: First, we must take back our schools.

    LIKE. LIKE. LIKE.

    AND AMEN.

    NAILED IT.

    • #1
    • January 22, 2018, at 11:17 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  2. RushBabe49 Thatcher

    I like your ideas. Basically, it’s just eliminating the hyphen. NO hyphenated-Americans anymore. If you don’t want to become an American, then don’t come here.

    • #2
    • January 22, 2018, at 11:28 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  3. David Foster Member
    David FosterJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Nazi ideology was really more racist than it was nationalist.

    Under the Kaiser, Anne Frank’s father fought for Germany in the First World War and was promoted to officer rank. Under the Nazis, he was thrown into a concentration camp.

    • #3
    • January 22, 2018, at 11:39 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  4. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Thatcher

    I think you have formulated the problem somewhat incorrectly. The issue is not the refusal of immigrants to assimilate into America. It is the view of large parts of our society, including the educational establishment, that immigrants should not assimilate. Instead, their vision is of creating the new Yugoslavia in the United States.

    I also think the change in views about assimilation is much more recent than you posit. For all of its other faults, progressivism was very nationalistic and pro-assimilation into the 1960s. It is in the last 50 years the Left has changed its view.

    • #4
    • January 22, 2018, at 11:41 AM PST
    • 14 likes
  5. Old Bathos Moderator

    I think most legal immigrants who applied without chain migration, temporary stay etc would be delighted to assimilate. Recall the true diversity in every old WW II movie in which every platoon had to have at least one Irish, Italian, Southern, Jewish and Polish guy. And every flick about New York City had shopkeepers and craftsmen with heavy accents proudly, gratefully declaring membership in the greatest nation on earth.

    The only barrier to assimilation is due to what we can call “post-white” narcissists. Tenured white people who decry their privilege, confess the sins of their (former?) race who nevertheless cling to positions and incomes commensurate with that unjust privilege. Having shed their “whiteness”, they become higher beings entitled to judge the rest of us. Oddly enough, black, brown and yellow people cannot shed their own racial “-ness”. They must remain in the protected little zones designed by their benevolent post-white overseers. An Asian-American enamored of the historical depth and substance of Anglo-American political philosophy or, worse, an African-American who sees the beauty and promise of free market economics are traitors who must be forcibly returned to their respective reservations. The only white philosophy they can hold is Marxism in any of its various metastatic perversions. They are required to be the beneficiaries of white guilt psychodrama whether they like it or not.

    A huge bolus of spoiled, malformed (and, yes “privileged”) white people is the only barrier to almost all solutions to American social problems.

    Maybe if we had a deal in which Mexico were required to take an annoying American white liberal for every Mexican immigrant we take, there would be no need for the wall.

    • #5
    • January 22, 2018, at 11:52 AM PST
    • 11 likes
  6. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Trink (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn: First, we must take back our schools.

    LIKE. LIKE. LIKE.

    AND AMEN.

    NAILED IT.

    Thanks, dear Trink. Like you, I think the schools are key, just like they’ve been key at the Leftist propaganda.

    • #6
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:11 PM PST
    • 1 like
  7. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    I like your ideas. Basically, it’s just eliminating the hyphen. NO hyphenated-Americans anymore. If you don’t want to become an American, then don’t come here.

    I love this idea, RB! They can talk about their history, heritage and culture as much as others are interested, but you are an American.

    • #7
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:12 PM PST
    • Like
  8. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Nazi ideology was really more racist than it was nationalist.

    Under the Kaiser, Anne Frank’s father fought for Germany in the First World War and was promoted to officer rank. Under the Nazis, he was thrown into a concentration camp.

    I agree, David. Even better than my argument.

    • #8
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:13 PM PST
    • Like
  9. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I think you have formulated the problem somewhat incorrectly. The issue is not the refusal of immigrants to assimilate into America. It is the view of large parts of our society, including the educational establishment, that immigrants should not assimilate. Instead, their vision is of creating the new Yugoslavia in the United States.

    I also think the change in views about assimilation is much more recent than you posit. For all of its other faults, progressivism was very nationalistic and pro-assimilation into the 1960s. It is in the last 50 years the Left has changed its view.

    Good points, Mark. I would add, though, that we’ll just need to work around the Left, if they are the ones who object. We need to reach immigrants directly and share the positive and uplifting story of America. We simply can’t let the Left indoctrinate them. Also, should have said the seeds were planted 100 years ago. Thanks for the correction.

    • #9
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:19 PM PST
    • Like
  10. The Reticulator Member

    Susan Quinn: Let’s begin to look at the start of our assimilation problems in this country. They actually are connected to perceptions that emerged from World Wars I and II. Out of those wars, a belief formed that the root of those conflicts was nationalism. If we look at this analysis carefully, we realize that it is absurd. The source of those conflicts was Germany’s obsession with becoming the world power; its desire to reach that goal included nationalism but was hardly limited to it. More than that, one could argue that the only way the nations could have successfully fought Germany was due to their own nationalism, the desire for the people and their countries to survive, free of German rule. Yet, the myths persisted that nationalism was destructive, evil, and was likened to Nazism, and the best alternative was to live in a global society where we created shared values.

    Like.

    • #10
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:19 PM PST
    • 1 like
  11. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    The only barrier to assimilation is due to what we can call “post-white” narcissists. Tenured white people who decry their privilege, confess the sins of their (former?) race who nevertheless cling to positions and incomes commensurate with that unjust privilege. Having shed their “whiteness”, they become higher beings entitled to judge the rest of us.

    I love this description, OB. And I’m sick of everyone, yes everyone being less than. We need to communicate the message to all those coming in that they all have the same opportunities and they don’t need to be victims, no matter what the white elites tell them. Thanks.

    • #11
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:22 PM PST
    • Like
  12. Pilli Inactive

    Last Fall, I spent a week in Emeryville, CA for work. On Saturday evening, I attended Mass. The priest had a distinct Irish accent. Before he ended Mass, he made the announcements and then came over to me and welcomed me as a visitor. Sticking his microphone in my face, he asked me my name and then commented that it was VERY Irish. He asked which county I was from. I told him I was from Jefferson County, TN but currently live in New Mexico. He was more than a bit put out and asked, “But aren’t you an Irishman at heart?” I answered, “No. I’m an American from Tennessee.” The conversation ended.

    The church had a large vertical banner on its front proclaiming Black Lives Matter! I wondered just how much trouble I would cause if I were to X-out “Black” and paint over it with “Jesus says, All”. Just a thought experiment.

    • #12
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:45 PM PST
    • 8 likes
  13. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Pilli (View Comment):
    He was more than a bit put out and asked, “But aren’t you an Irishman at heart?” I answered, “No. I’m an American from Tennessee.” The conversation ended.

    Hot dog!!! Well done, Pilli! I just want to give you a big hug! This is precisely the example that I would love people to set.

    • #13
    • January 22, 2018, at 12:51 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  14. David Foster Member
    David FosterJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    The primary inhibitor to assimilation is America’s…more, generally, the West’s….loss of civilizational self-confidence, with all those voices in academia and the media denouncing everything about us.

    However, this is not the only inhibitor. In earlier times, a decision to immigrate meant in most cases cutting oneself quite completely from everything one had known. If you came here in 1870, the sea voyage was likely to be uncomfortable and dangerous, and mail was slow. Even in 1910, there were no trans-oceaninc phone calls. Even in 1960, such phone calls were hideously expensive. So the psychological threshold for making the move was much higher, and the disconnection from ‘the old country’ was much more complete.

    And, of course, the absence of a ‘social safety net’ meant that immigrants, unless they were wealthy, knew they would have to work and work hard.

    • #14
    • January 22, 2018, at 1:01 PM PST
    • 9 likes
  15. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    David Foster (View Comment):
    The primary inhibitor to assimilation is America’s…more, generally, the West’s….loss of civilizational self-confidence, with all those voices in academia and the media denouncing everything about us.

    All good points, @davidfoster. When did we begin to treat academia like they were gods? How did we fall into that trap, do you think?

    • #15
    • January 22, 2018, at 1:18 PM PST
    • Like
  16. Ralphie Member

    You’ve basically described the assimilation of my grandparents. The first thing they learned was the hard knocks of not knowing English. They didn’t teach their kids Polish, I guess, because it was a handicap for them here. If left alone, they will assimilate without anyone needing to run interference. Both natives and immigrants will learn to co operate without force.

    It is a different world, where it is assumed America somehow is not comprised of its citizens, but of a government that bestows things. When and if government is smaller, citizens figure it out.

    • #16
    • January 22, 2018, at 1:26 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  17. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Ralphie (View Comment):
    You’ve basically described the assimilation of my grandparents. The first thing they learned was the hard knocks of not knowing English. They didn’t teach their kids Polish, I guess, because it was a handicap for them here. If left alone, they will assimilate without anyone needing to run interference. Both natives and immigrants will learn to co operate without force.

    A huge part of this attitude is whether you see human beings as basically resilient and full of potential; unfortunately the Left sees people as helpless victims. Well, I guess that helps them feel superior, @ralphie. G-d bless your grandparents, and all the other immigrants who did what they needed to do to survive, and in many cases, thrive.

    • #17
    • January 22, 2018, at 1:33 PM PST
    • 1 like
  18. Old Buckeye Inactive

    Susan, this topic is one I have pondered as well. It seems obvious that some who come here are not at all interested in assimilating. I’m thinking in terms of enclaves such as Dearborn, Michigan, and Somali-land in Minnesota, or those in the LaRaza organization.

    Try immigrating anywhere else that isn’t a third-world country. At one time, my husband and I considered going the ex-pat route but soon discovered that most places would be off limits to us because we didn’t meet age, income/net worth, or job requirements. I also recognized that I’d be required to learn a second language if we went somewhere that English wasn’t spoken.

    • #18
    • January 22, 2018, at 2:15 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  19. David Foster Member
    David FosterJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    When did we begin to treat academia like they were gods? How did we fall into that trap, do you think?

    Just as a hypothesis…in the late 1950s and early 1960s, the prestige of science was very high…a reflection of nuclear energy, medical advances, computers, industrial automation, jet aviation, rocketry, etc. Not all of this work was done in academia by any means, but a fair amount of it was. I suspect that the prestige which rightly accrued to the Physics department and the Microbiology department was in effect ‘borrowed’ by the other departments.

    The positioning of college as the only gateway to a good job, and the VA bill enabling far greater college attendance also played their roles. And with the decline of formal religion, academics have begun to play the part of a priesthood.

    • #19
    • January 22, 2018, at 2:16 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  20. Valiuth Inactive
    ValiuthJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Susan Quinn: They are free to practice their religions and cultures within their homes and communities, that is, privately

    How can their communities be private when they are integrated into our larger cities and urban areas? Can there really be a private community, without creating isolated ethnic enclaves but then again are those ethnic enclaves not exactly what you are arguing against? Let us take two rather small but obvious groups Amish and Hasidic Jews. Don’t both of these populations which live quite happily in the US not violate your rules of assimilation? Can we allow private education if we are to implement this vision of assimilation? Won’t that offer away out? What do you do with Native American tribes?

    I think the vision of assimilation you paint is narrow and flawed just like the vision of multiculturalism that progressive have.

    The goal of assimilation is the creation of a new and shared common culture that combines elements of the assimilating groups. Both cultures will be able to see themselves in the new culture, but the new culture will be distinct from both previous ones at least to a certain degree. Assimilation therefore is really the extension of natural cultural change over time. The balancing point of the new culture though doesn’t have to be dictated by the government. It will be discovered by the people in the course of creating it.

    So my advise on this issue is to just get out of the way. Communities will figure it out from the ground up. What you propose here seems as top down as anything the liberals would propose. But, of course it has to be because it is goal oriented, and if you have an idea of what the assimilated culture should look like you will have to force people into your vision. I don’t think that is what our constitutional order is about and I think it is precisely because of this letting people figure it out from the ground up that America has been great at assimilating various people over the years.

    • #20
    • January 22, 2018, at 2:38 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  21. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member

    Susan, I agree about the unfortunate effect of WWII on American patriotism, but I think that the problem is deeper.

    We used to have a broad consensus on the content of American values. This included political and moral values. The political values were those of the American founding, largely derived from Locke. The moral values were essentially Protestant Christianity. These moral values were generally in accord Catholic and Jewish values, so assimilation of these groups was relatively easy.

    We no longer have consensus on either of these sets of values. I think that a significant portion of the Left, which seems to have been in control of the Democratic party since the 1960s, is opposed to traditional American moral and political values. Bill Clinton may have been an exception to this, though I was certainly not a fan of his. I think that for almost 50 years now, the goal of the Left has been to import immigrants who do not share our traditional values, and then oppose assimilation of such immigrants, in order to obtain greater political support for Leftist causes.

    I like your ideas about education, language, and ceasing accommodations, although I don’t see how they could be implemented without first winning the political battle. I also worry about the accommodation issue. For example, are we going to require orthodox Jews to eat pork in military rations?

    I think that serious restrictions on immigration will also be required for a number of years. This is probably the easiest thing to implement, and seems to be proceeding as well as could be expected.

    • #21
    • January 22, 2018, at 2:53 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  22. I Walton Member

    Good article. Big issue. It does go back a long way, some back to Nietzsche and Nihilism, but a flabby American version along with flabby American marxism. These aren’t bearded bomb throwing anarchists, they haven’t read the originals of anything, and are’t really passionate about anything except fitting in. They absorbed nihilism and marxism from their half educated teachers and the culture that came out of the 60’s. It’s true that nationalism got a bad rap, Mussolini, an opportunistic marxists explicitly adopted nationalism because the Great War taught him and his intellectual supporters that nationalism was a more powerful organizing force than international socialism, and Hitler who was his own thing and that included German nationalism. The First WW wasn’t nationalism it was the horrifically painful and unnecessary gasp of the dying old aristocratic order. The US had national pride but has never been a nation, so nationalism in the French, German English, Polish, Russian etc. way makes no sense. We took pride in our founding and the ideas behind it. So we could assimilate Italians, Irish et al behind those ideas joining them intellectually to the English, German and French who came before them, even though it was neither a cultural nor an intellectual movement. It was just who we were. It was natural and it was what made the country exceptional. Those who for some deranged drug induced, draft fearing delusion became anti American multiculturalists impacted everything because they were the baby boomer. They got tenure, filled our schools and our media and here we are, trying to undo what they have done and still do. It’s not easy because a vast compost pile of parasites have learned how to exploit this decay for power and a little wealth. They’re called the Democratic party and they keep the destruction going because they feed off the decay and rot.

    • #22
    • January 22, 2018, at 3:03 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  23. Hypatia Inactive

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn: They are free to practice their religions and cultures within their homes and communities, that is, privately

    How can their communities be private when they are integrated into our larger cities and urban areas? Can there really be a private community, without creating isolated ethnic enclaves but then again are those ethnic enclaves not exactly what you are arguing against? Let us take two rather small but obvious groups Amish and Hasidic Jews. Don’t both of these populations which live quite happily in the US not violate your rules of assimilation? Can we allow private education if we are to implement this vision of assimilation? Won’t that offer away out? What do you do with Native American tribes?

    I think the vision of assimilation you paint is narrow and flawed just like the vision of multiculturalism that progressive have.

    The goal of assimilation is the creation of a new and shared common culture that combines elements of the assimilating groups. Both cultures will be able to see themselves in the new culture, but the new culture will be distinct from both previous ones at least to a certain degree. Assimilation therefore is really the extension of natural cultural change over time. The balancing point of the new culture though doesn’t have to be dictated by the government. It will be discovered by the people in the course of creating it.

    So my advise on this issue is to just get out of the way. Communities will figure it out from the ground up. What you propose here seems as top down as anything the liberals would propose. But, of course it has to be because it is goal oriented, and if you have an idea of what the assimilated culture should look like you will have to force people into your vision. I don’t think that is what our constitutional order is about and I think it is precisely because of this letting people figure it out from the ground up that America has been great at assimilating various people over the years.

    No, we were  great at it, till we were bamboozled into absndonong the methods that had worked so well. People are not going to figure anything out together if there is no common ground, if they don’t even speak the same language. “Narrow and flawed”? Look in the mirror.

    • #23
    • January 22, 2018, at 3:10 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  24. Hypatia Inactive

    @susanquinn, I think the most important line in your post is the observation that if it was German “nationalism” that led to WW I and II, it was also  nationalism which ended those wars.

    Our nation must not be transformed into a polyglot holding pen.

    • #24
    • January 22, 2018, at 3:14 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  25. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    David Foster (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    When did we begin to treat academia like they were gods? How did we fall into that trap, do you think?

    Just as a hypothesis…in the late 1950s and early 1960s, the prestige of science was very high…a reflection of nuclear energy, medical advances, computers, industrial automation, jet aviation, rocketry, etc. Not all of this work was done in academia by any means, but a fair amount of it was. I suspect that the prestige which rightly accrued to the Physics department and the Microbiology department was in effect ‘borrowed’ by the other departments.

    The positioning of college as the only gateway to a good job, and the VA bill enabling far greater college attendance also played their roles. And with the decline of formal religion, academics have begun to play the part of a priesthood.

    Very good diagnosis, David. It’s likely complex and multi-faceted.

    • #25
    • January 22, 2018, at 3:16 PM PST
    • Like
  26. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn: They are free to practice their religions and cultures within their homes and communities, that is, privately

    How can their communities be private when they are integrated into our larger cities and urban areas? Can there really be a private community, without creating isolated ethnic enclaves but then again are those ethnic enclaves not exactly what you are arguing against? Let us take two rather small but obvious groups Amish and Hasidic Jews. Don’t both of these populations which live quite happily in the US not violate your rules of assimilation? Can we allow private education if we are to implement this vision of assimilation? Won’t that offer away out? What do you do with Native American tribes?

    I think the vision of assimilation you paint is narrow and flawed just like the vision of multiculturalism that progressive have.

    The goal of assimilation is the creation of a new and shared common culture that combines elements of the assimilating groups. Both cultures will be able to see themselves in the new culture, but the new culture will be distinct from both previous ones at least to a certain degree. Assimilation therefore is really the extension of natural cultural change over time. The balancing point of the new culture though doesn’t have to be dictated by the government. It will be discovered by the people in the course of creating it.

    So my advise on this issue is to just get out of the way. Communities will figure it out from the ground up. What you propose here seems as top down as anything the liberals would propose. But, of course it has to be because it is goal oriented, and if you have an idea of what the assimilated culture should look like you will have to force people into your vision. I don’t think that is what our constitutional order is about and I think it is precisely because of this letting people figure it out from the ground up that America has been great at assimilating various people over the years.

    Valiuth, I meant clubs, associations, and religious communities, not the communities in which they reside. I hope that helps.

    • #26
    • January 22, 2018, at 3:20 PM PST
    • Like
  27. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western ChauvinistJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I agree nationalism has been assigned undue negative connotations. Nationalism is like religion. If a particular religion’s tenets lead to human flourishing, you can call that a “good” religion. The philosophical underpinnings of America have made it the greatest good for the most people in history. Therefore, it is a good nation and American nationalism is warranted.

    And that is related to the problem with the recent failure of immigrants to assimilate. After all, why would anyone want to assimilate into a nation that needs to be “fundamentally” transformed? It’s the toxic anti-Americanism of the Left behind the trend. The Left is the problem. The Left seeks power and has found the best way to get it is to divide (by victim group) and conquer. If we’re going to combat this, we’d better know our enemy.

    As to education, don’t worry, Susan. Hillsdale is way ahead of you. It has already developed and refined a K-12 curriculum at the Hillsdale charter adjacent to the campus based on Western Heritage and Judeo-Christian values (I’m convinced my girls have had a better education at the local Hillsdale curriculum charter than 99% of college graduates — and the youngest is only in 10th grade!). Through the Barney Initiative, Hillsdale is planning to infiltrate open at least one charter in every state over the next several years. We’re getting a second one in Colorado Springs this fall, and another opened in Golden a couple years ago! Together with its online adult education courses and the Hillsdale Dialogues with Hugh Hewitt every Friday, Hillsdale is pushing hard against the leftist indoctrination. That’s why the Left is constantly targeting Hillsdale. They know their enemy!

    Don’t fret. Send money. Seriously. Hillsdale is a great investment in America’s future.

    • #27
    • January 22, 2018, at 3:36 PM PST
    • 6 likes
  28. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Let us take two rather small but obvious groups Amish and Hasidic Jews. Don’t both of these populations which live quite happily in the US not violate your rules of assimilation? Can we allow private education if we are to implement this vision of assimilation? Won’t that offer away out? What do you do with Native American tribes?

    I wanted to address some of your other questions, @valiuth. I didn’t say anywhere that cultural/religious communities couldn’t live together. So I don’t know why you bring them up. Of course, we can allow private education; we can simply encourage private schools to include the same things. Native Americans? Where did that come from–they’re not immigrants, and to my knowledge they speak English.

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    The balancing point of the new culture though doesn’t have to be dictated by the government. It will be discovered by the people in the course of creating it.

    As @hypatia stated, it was once that way. But there are a number of communities who choose to isolate themselves; that approach to life is not helpful. BTW, I’m not trying to force people into anything; I’m trying to give them the opportunity to be exposed to the ideas that the founders intended them to know and try to offset the hogwash coming from the left. Ultimately people will decide which ideas they believe for themselves.

    • #28
    • January 22, 2018, at 4:05 PM PST
    • Like
  29. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    Arizona Patriot (View Comment):
    We used to have a broad consensus on the content of American values. This included political and moral values. The political values were those of the American founding, largely derived from Locke. The moral values were essentially Protestant Christianity. These moral values were generally in accord Catholic and Jewish values, so assimilation of these groups was relatively easy.

    This information could easily be integrated into teaching the values of the founding fathers. The idea is that immigrants will be exposed to these values. Let me be clear on one other thing: I’m a strong believer in allowing people to think what they wish, their beliefs and values included. We can’t force people to think like us. We can only expose them to these ideas. Also I will try to hold people accountable for their actions–we have seen unacceptable lawlessness and violence and that has to stop. All of this I believe is consistent with American values.

    Arizona Patriot (View Comment):
    For example, are we going to require orthodox Jews to eat pork in military rations?

    Perhaps an orthodox Jew could speculate on this concern. I suspect that there are rations that do not have pork, and meals that are non-dairy or meat; vegans might want this choice. But I’m not sure. It’s a good question, AP. Maybe @iwe might know or @jamesgawron.

    • #29
    • January 22, 2018, at 4:12 PM PST
    • Like
  30. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn

    I Walton (View Comment):
    It’s not easy because a vast compost pile of parasites have learned how to exploit this decay for power and a little wealth. They’re called the Democratic party and they keep the destruction going because they feed off the decay and rot.

    This is one of the best description yet that I’ve seen of the ugliness the Left has wrought. Nice work, IW.

    • #30
    • January 22, 2018, at 4:15 PM PST
    • 1 like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.